BUSH OR GORE - A DIFFERENCE OF PHILOSOPHY
There are some among us who are trying to make the upcoming election a non-event, claiming that the Republicans and Democrats have so melded together that it really doesn't make any difference whether the next president's name is Gore or Bush. I beg to differ with them.
There's a big difference in the philosophies of the two candidates, and to me it breaks down to one candidate whose basic philosophical tenets still tend to lean toward less government, and the other candidate who still wants more government and thinks it is the answer. One candidate will strive to put more money back into the hands of the people and let them decide what to do with it, and the other candidate doesn't trust the people nearly so much, and thinks that Big Brother is the answer.
An example for savers and investors; Bush has come out in favor of some sort of equitizing of Social Security. He feels the current system is not working, and any one who understands its demographics has to know that it will implode sometime in the next decade. Mr. Gore says the current system is the answer, and-- and this is the part that ought to make everybody as crazy as it makes me-- that we shouldn't dare equitize any portion of Social Security because it's a risky scheme that most people couldn't handle.
That's right, the candidate Gore, basically, says that the people, you and me, cannot be trusted with their own future retirement money because we'll make bad investments, or worse yet, gamble or drink it away, and be left with nothing. That, to me, is a very narrow view of the American people and their abilities to manage their money. I don't buy into it.
Staying on the saving and investing line a moment longer, Bush would back expansion of IRAs, 401(k)s and 403(b)s, continuing with the philosophy of letting people be responsible for their own financial future, and giving them the wherewithal to do it. However, Mr. Gore seems to think that, again, it's just too much responsibility for the average person, and he sees danger lurking around every corner.
Then there is the issue of the surplus. Bush wants to take a portion and return it to the people in the form of tax cuts. Let us remember that a surplus is only derived by the government overtaxing us. In a perfect system, which is admittedly not achievable government's tax system would extract exactly enough money to pay for everything, and no more. As everyone knows, we've run up these terrible deficits for years, and now that we've finally achieved a surplus, all the politicians in Washington, trying to figure out ways to buy our votes, are trying to find ways to use the surplus. Gore is saying that the surplus should be used to pay off the deficit, and he uses the Fed Chairman's name to support his argument, claiming that 'even the Fed Chairman realizes that the surpluses have to go for retiring the deficit.'
Well, admittedly, Mr. Greenspan's first choice with the surplus has been to pay off the deficit. But what the national press doesn't want you to hear and won't report is that his second choice is tax cuts. And what the national press really doesn't want you to hear is that Mr. Greenspan absolutely does not want the surplus to be used for new federal programs. If you look closely at Gore's proposals, you see a substantial amount of the surplus being slated for just that; something for everyone, in the finest tradition of the Democratic party.
At the bottom line, it still comes back to my original point on philosophies. So just ask yourself, do you want more or less government? Do you think decisions about you, your life, your savings, your local communities, should be handled by you and your state and local governments, or do you think you need the help of an all-knowing, all-powerful Big Brother from Washington? As Gerald Ford once reminded us, "Any government big enough to give you everything, is also big enough to take it away."
So, I think there are issues that people ought to be excited about, there are differences in the candidates, and most of all, I think everyone ought to get out and vote this coming November. Sadly, experts say probably less than 40% of the population will vote, but that makes everyone who does vote just that much more powerful.
(Tom Butenhoff is a First Vice President with J. E.
Liss & Company in Milwaukee. The views are his and not necessarily
those of Liss Financial Services or the Job Connection/Hiring
Network.)